Daily Archives: February 1, 2022

John Eastman, the conservative law professor who authored memos outlining how President Donald Trump could overturn the results of the 2020 election, invoked his Fifth Amendment rights 146 times when he was questioned by the Jan. 6 committee last month, a lawyer for the panel revealed late Monday.

The disclosure came in a court hearing before U.S. District Judge David Carter in Santa Ana, Calif., on Eastmans lawsuit to block a subpoena from the committee directing Chapman University where he previously worked as a professor to turn over more than 19,000 emails relating to his work for Trump in the months following the Nov. 3, 2020, election.

Attorney John Eastman, alongside Rudy Giuliani, speaks on Jan. 6, 2021, ahead of then-President Donald Trumps speech to contest the certification of the 2020 presidential election results. (Jim Bourg/Reuters)

The Eastman emails are considered crucial evidence by the committee because, in its view, the law professors memos laid out a road map for a constitutional coup: They argued that Vice President Mike Pence could refuse to accept the certified results of the Electoral College vote declaring President-elect Joe Biden the winner. Pence publicly rejected Eastmans advice, agreeing with the vast majority of legal experts who said he did not have the power to reverse the voters.

But Trump backed Eastmans legal views and lashed out at Pence on Jan. 6, 2021, calling on his vice president to show extreme courage during the vote certification. At the Stop the Steal rally that day in Washington, where Eastman also spoke, Trump urged his fans to fight like hell in support of his false claims that the election had been stolen. Many of those supporters then stormed the U.S. Capitol, assaulted Capitol Police officers and even chanted, Hang Mike Pence!

Trump supporters gather around a noose near the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. (Shay Horse/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Eastman was questioned by the committee in a Dec. 9 deposition, but he refused to answer any questions on the grounds that it could violate his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination for potential criminal activity, the House lawyer, Doug Letter, disclosed. Just days after the deposition, Eastman sued the committee to protect his emails from disclosure, arguing that they were protected by attorney-client privilege covering his communications with then-President Trump and his legal team. In response to pointed questioning from the judge on Monday, Eastmans lawyer said his client has not even produced a privilege log identifying which of the emails are covered by the privilege because to do so would risk disclosing the existence of emails that could undercut his assertion of Fifth Amendment rights.

Story continues

But Eastmans argument suffered a blow when the lawyer for Chapman University, whose computer hosts the emails, told the judge that the professor had no right to use the university email system for his representation of Trump because it was partisan work on behalf of a political candidate a violation of the universitys status as a nonprofit.

Eastman speaking in April 2021. (Andy Cross/The Denver Post via Getty Images)

Any use by Eastman of Chapman emails on behalf of Trump was improper and unauthorized, said Fred Plevin, a lawyer for Chapman. I liken [it] to contraband, he added.

Once a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Eastman appears to have played a central role in developing strategies for Trump to cling to office even though state electoral boards had affirmed Bidens victory in the election. In addition to speaking at the Jan. 6 Stop the Steal rally along with Trump, Rudy Giuliani and Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks, Eastman testified before a Georgia legislative committee urging it to reject Bidens win in that state.

Eastmans lawyer, Charles Burnham, argued to Carter that Chapmans dean was well aware of his clients legal work for Trump and raised no objections. But Carter seemed most focused on why there had been no privilege log developed so that the law professor could specifically identify which of his communications he believed are covered by attorney-client privilege. He demanded that Eastman be provided with the emails by Chapman, review them and after consulting with the Jan. 6 committee lawyers come up with a plan for who should resolve any disputes: the judge or a so-called taint team of lawyers who would review the emails on their own. Carter said he wanted a status report on the matter next Monday.

Read more:
Jan. 6 panel: Lawyer behind Trump election memos invoked 5th Amendment 146 times - Yahoo News

WASHINGTON Marc Short, who served as chief of staff to former Vice President Mike Pence, testified privately last week before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the latest turn in weeks of negotiations between the panels investigators and Mr. Pences team.

Mr. Short appeared in response to a subpoena from the committee, according to three people with knowledge of the developments, making him the most senior person around Mr. Pence who is known to have cooperated in the inquiry.

Investigators believe that participation by the former vice president and his inner circle is critical, because Mr. Pence resisted a pressure campaign by former President Donald J. Trump to use his role in presiding over Congresss official count of electoral votes to try to overturn the 2020 election.

Mr. Short was with Mr. Pence on Jan. 6 as a mob of Mr. Trumps supporters attacked the Capitol, and has firsthand knowledge of the effort by Mr. Trump and his allies to try to persuade the former vice president to throw out legitimate electoral votes for Joseph R. Biden Jr. in favor of fake slates of pro-Trump electors.

The people spoke on condition of anonymity about Mr. Shorts testimony, which was earlier reported by CNN.

Investigators have been in high-stakes negotiations for months with Mr. Pences team about whether he would cooperate with the inquiry. In recent weeks, they have sought the cooperation of Mr. Short and Greg Jacob, Mr. Pences former lawyer.

Mr. Short and Mr. Jacob were both closely involved in Mr. Pences consideration of whether to go along with Mr. Trumps insistence that he try to block the official count of Electoral College results by a joint session of Congress. Three days before the proceeding, the two men met with John Eastman, a lawyer then advising Mr. Trump, about a memo Mr. Eastman had written setting out a case for why Mr. Pence had the power to hold off the certification.

As a mob was attacking the Capitol chanting Hang Mike Pence, Mr. Eastman sent a hostile email to Mr. Jacobs, blaming Mr. Pence for the violence.

The siege is because YOU and your boss did not do what was necessary to allow this to be aired in a public way so that the American people can see for themselves what happened, the lawyer, Mr. Eastman, wrote to Mr. Jacob.

Mr. Eastman has since invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to defy the committees subpoena.

Ivanka Trump. The daughter of the former president, who served as one of his senior advisers, has been asked to cooperateafter the panel said it had gathered evidence that she had implored her father to call off the violence as his supporters stormed the Capitol.

Mark Meadows. Mr. Trumps chief of staff, who initially provided the panel with a trove of documents that showed the extent of his rolein the efforts to overturn the election, is now refusing to cooperate. The House voted to recommend holding Mr. Meadows in criminal contempt of Congress.

Marc Short. Mr. Pences chief of staff, who has firsthand knowledge of Mr. Trumps pressure campaign on the vice president to throw out the election results, testified before the panel under subpoena. He is the most senior person around Mr. Pence who is known to have cooperated.

Scott Perry and Jim Jordan. The Republican representatives of Pennsylvania and Ohio are among a group of G.O.P. congressmenwho were deeply involved in efforts to overturn the election. Both Mr. Perryand Mr. Jordanhaverefused to cooperate with the panel.

Big Tech firms. The panel has criticized Alphabet, Meta, Reddit and Twitterfor allowing extremism to spread on their platforms and saying they have failed to cooperate adequately with the inquiry. The committee has issued subpoenas to all four companies.

Fake Trump electors. The panel has issued subpoenas to 14 people who were part of bogus slates of electors for Mr. Trumpin seven states won by President Biden: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Roger Stone and Alex Jones. The panels interest in the political operative and the conspiracy theoristindicate that investigators are intent on learning the details of the planning and financing of rallies that drew Mr. Trumps supporters to Washington based on his lies of a stolen election.

Michael Flynn. Mr. Trumps former national security adviser attended an Oval Office meeting on Dec. 18 in which participants discussed seizing voting machines and invoking certain national security emergency powers. Mr. Flynn has filed a lawsuitto block the panels subpoenas.

Phil Waldron. The retired Army colonelhas been under scrutiny since a 38-page PowerPoint documenthe circulated on Capitol Hill was turned over to the panel by Mr. Meadows. The document contained extreme plans to overturn the election.

John Eastman. The lawyer has been the subject of intense scrutiny since writing a memothat laid out how Mr. Trump could stay in power. Mr. Eastman was present at a meeting of Trump allies at the Willard Hotelthat has becomea prime focus of the panel.

Keith Kellogg, a retired lieutenant general who was Mr. Pences national security adviser, has also testified before the committee. Mr. Kellogg told investigators that as rioters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, Mr. Trump rejected pleas from him as well as from Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, and Kayleigh McEnany, the press secretary, to call for an end to the violence. He said Ivanka Trump, Mr. Trumps eldest daughter and adviser, also attempted to intervene at least twice.

Mr. Kellogg said he and Ms. Trump also witnessed a telephone call in the Oval Office on the morning of Jan. 6 in which Mr. Trump pressured Mr. Pence to go along with a plan to throw out electoral votes. Mr. Kellogg told the committee that the president had accused Mr. Pence of not being tough enough to overturn the election.

Ms. Trump then turned to Mr. Kellogg and said, Mike Pence is a good man, Mr. Kellogg testified.

The developments come as Mr. Trump has continued to criticize Mr. Pence for refusing to embrace the call to overturn the 2020 election.

Mike Pence did have the right to change the outcome, and they now want to take that right away, Mr. Trump said in a statement, referring to a group of senators who are discussing revamping the Electoral Count Act to clarify that the vice president cannot unilaterally change the election results. Unfortunately, he didnt exercise that power, he could have overturned the election!

Mr. Trump also said at a rally over the weekend that he might offer pardons to criminal defendants charged in connection with the Jan. 6 riot, and that he would organize more protests should he be charged with a crime.

See the rest here:
Former Pence Chief of Staff Has Testified to the Jan. 6 Committee - The New York Times

By Shereen Siewert

A special council meeting is set for Tuesday in Wausau to discuss how the city will acquire land to accommodate a proposed recreational trail at the Business Campus, after the city attorney pointed to a state law that prohibits the use of eminent domain for such uses.

The project, which is funded at 80 percent by a Department of Transportation grant and 20 percent through city participation, requires Wausau to acquire permanent limited easements and temporary limited easements from six separate properties, which are now privately owned. Wausau Director of Public Works Eric Lindman, in a Jan. 28 memo to council members, said the city is progressing through the eminent domain process currently.

But that might not be legal in Wisconsin. In 2017, Act 59 of Wisconsins budget bill amended the states statutes to prohibit the use of eminent domain, or condemnation, to establish or extend recreational trails, bicycle ways, bicycle lanes or pedestrian ways.

Eminent domain is the right of government to take private property for public use following fair compensation. Using eminent domain to acquire property is considered controversial for several reasons. The Fifth Amendment and nearly all state constitutions mandate that government may only take private property for a public use. Almost from the very beginning, there has been conflict between advocates of the narrow and broad interpretations of this rule.

Dist. 3 Alder Tom Kilian last week asked City Attorney Anne Jacobson to weigh in on whether eminent domain was appropriate for the project, which was initially included in the councils consent agenda until Kilian asked the item to be removed for more discussion.

Kilian said that given his neighborhoods experience with eminent domain issues along Thomas Street, eminent domain is not something Im very fond of.

Jacobson told the council that the city is not always required to follow eminent domain to acquire property. Once the council agrees to use eminent domain, the city must follow through on the same process which can be complex and costly.

I dont know why theyre starting down this road or if theyve thought of other options, but it appears youre being asked to approve a relocation order, Jacobson said, noting that the order is the first step in the eminent domain process.

In addition to the public use debate, there is a documented tendency to under compensate owners of condemned property. The Supreme Court has long held that owners must get fair market value compensation, which critics say fails to account for the subjective value that many attach to their land over and above its market value. For example, a homeowner who has lived in the same neighborhood for decades places value on the social ties formed there, while a small business could have established a network of clients that would be hard to replicate elsewhere. Studies also show that owners often dont even get the fair market value compensation that the law requires.

Alder Lisa Rasmussen, who represents Dist. 7, said the land acquisition necessary would only rely on easements to address utility issues. But Jacobson responded by pointing out that even those easements are still an interest in land, which could be acquired through other means.

Kilian asked that the city attorney explore the issue further.

The multi-use trail is planned along 72nd Avenue from Packer Drive to International Drive. Prior to last weeks meeting, Wausaus Capital Improvements and Street Maintenance (CISM) Committee and Plan Commission approved an order that would have allowed the City to relocate or change and acquire certain lands or interests in lands for the trail. Both bodies had previously approved the temporary and permanent acquisition of lands for the trail project unanimously.

The council voted last week to table the issue for two weeks to allow for input from city staff. But a special meeting was since set for this week.

The meeting will be held at 6:15 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall, 407 Grant St., Wausau. Access the meeting materials at this link. Members of the public can attend remotely by calling 1-408-418-9388. The access code is 2482 494 6300 and the meetings password is cVj4MRJWv69.

View post:
Wausau calls special meeting to discuss legality of using eminent domain for recreational trail - wausaupilotandreview.com

On the February 2nd agenda for Conshohockens Borough Council is an item involving the potential eminent domain of the Outbound Station property at 2 Harry Street. The agenda reads:

Discuss and consider authorizing advertisement of an ordinance to authorize eminent domain of 2 Harry Street (Tax Map Parcel No. 05-00-04876-00-6)

According to property records, the property has been owned by Joe and Barbara Collins since 1978. According to a source, the Collins were not aware this was being considered. Joe Collins is a former mayor of the borough.

In recent years, there have been three cafes that have leased the building. It has been vacant since the beginning of 2019.

As you may remember, MoreThanTheCurve.com has reported that this property is set to become a home to the Couch Tomato and it is expected to open in the coming months.

The 2 Harry Street property is unusual in that it is almost completely surrounded by parcels under different ownership. The surrounding parcels are owned by the estate of Ray Weinmann, who was one of the original developers behind the redevelopment of the lower end of Conshohocken. He passed away in 2021. These parcels are currently for sale.

The fifth amendment to the Constitution of the United States covers eminent domain. It reads (we bolded the relevant language):

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

We emailed Borough Manager Stephanie Cecco to inquire what the public use for this property would involve. We did not receive a reply (to be fair we only sent the email at 12:13 p.m.).

Two obvious uses are no longer needed. SEPTA recently announced that it is building a parking garage that will add approximately 400 spaces to the train station area. The apartments under construction at 400 West Elm Street also will add amenities connected to the use of the Schuylkill River Trail.

Questions:

How the Outbound Station property could be utilized for public use without the neighboring parcels is curious.

Is the intent to eminent domain this one property and other adjacent ones in the future?

The rest is here:
Borough of Conshohocken to consider the eminent domain of Outbound Station property - morethanthecurve.com

Find out where and how you can get vaccines and testing for COVID-19 this week, based on information provided by Joint Information Center.

Construction company Core Tech International wants the government of Guam to pay it at least $130 million and monthly rent for as long as the Guam Waterworks Authority operates the islands wastewater treatment plant in Dededo.

Core Tech also wants the Superior Court of Guam to order the payment of 42 years of back rent, plus interest, for the wastewater plant, which Core Tech alleges sits on ancestral land Core Tech acquired in 2015.

Construction work continues of the Guam Waterworks Authoritys new Northern District Wastewater Treatment Plant in Dededo on Monday, Jan. 31, 2022.

According to GWA, if Core Tech wins its land case in the Superior Court of Guam, the enormous payments to Core Tech could result in higher water bills for the island.

Although GWA has argued it clearly owns the land used for the Northern District Wastewater Treatment Plant, which started operating in 1980, Superior Court Judge Elyze Iriarte in November ruled that Core Tech has an ownership interest in the land and therefore can continue to pursue its claims in court.

Construction work continues of the Guam Waterworks Authoritys new Northern District Wastewater Treatment Plant in Dededo on Monday, Jan. 31, 2022.

She rejected a request by the Department of Land Management and GWA to dismiss Core Techs claim.

Construction work continues on upgrades being implemented at the existing Guam Waterworks Authoritys Northern District Wastewater Treatment Plant on Monday, Jan. 31, 2022.

Land Management and GWA have argued that Core Techs ownership claim is based on flawed certificates of title issued by Land Management in 2010, and that Guam law prohibits the wastewater plant site from ever being transferred to private ownership. Land Management has asked the court for permission to change and revoke those certificates of title.

Land Management and GWA in early January petitioned the Supreme Court of Guam, challenging Iriartes ruling.

The Supreme Court assigned a case number to the governments petition, but has not issued any orders or set any deadlines in connection with the petition.

Construction work continues on upgrades being implemented at the existing Guam Waterworks Authoritys Northern District Wastewater Treatment Plant on Monday, Jan. 31, 2022.

If justices agree to hear the petition, they will be asked to consider two issues: whether the five-year statute of limitations expired for Core Tech to file an inverse condemnation claim against GovGuam; and whether the Superior Court made an error when it stated Core Tech has an interest in the property, despite two public laws that prohibit the transfer of excess federal land that is being used for public easements.

The case started in December 2018, when Land Management sued Core Tech, asking the Superior Court to allow Land Management to cancel and change the certificates of title.

Core Tech counter-sued in January 2020, claiming GovGuam and GWA illegally condemned the land without paying for it and are encroaching on Core Tech property after tearing down Core Techs fences in order to expand the wastewater facility.

GWA currently is spending $122 million, provided by the military in connection with the military buildup, to upgrade the wastewater plant, including new secondary treatment facilities. Black Construction won the contract in June 2019. The wastewater plant serves residents of northern Guam and Andersen Air Force Base and also will serve the new Marine Corps base under construction in Dededo.

The federal government in 1980 gave GovGuam a lease to maintain and operate the wastewater plant, which was built on 13 acres of military land within the 862-acre Air Force communications annex.

The federal government later returned 3,213 acres of excess federal land to the government of Guam, including the communications annex.

The Guam Ancestral Lands Commission in 2006 deeded 257 acres of excess federal land to the estate of Jose Martinez Torres, including part of the communications annex.

The Torres estate in September 2007 sold 252 acres of its ancestral land to Kil Yoo Yoon for $21.4 million. Yoon in 2008 subdivided the property into eight smaller lots, and in January 2010 deeded the land to his company, Younex Enterprises Corporation.

Core Tech acquired the property in May 2015, for $178.1 million, after Younex defaulted on its mortgage with Core Tech, documents state.

According to Judge Iriarte, Core Techs ownership interest is related to that mortgage and the sale of the property to Core Tech, which resulted in Core Tech receiving a mortgagees deed.

According to Core Techs counterclaim in Superior Court, the government of Guam and GWA have used and occupied lot 10184-7 for the wastewater plant without the consent and permission of Core Tech, which amounts to an illegal taking and a violation of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Core Tech states GovGuam and GWA failed to pay Core Tech or any prior owner for using the property, and Core Tech suffered serious severance damages to its property of at least $130 million.

Core Tech wants back rent and interest, retroactive to May 1980, with monthly rent payments until GovGuam and GWA vacate the premises.

The federal government, which owned the land for decades, including when it was an Air Force communications annex, still has an interest in the Dededo property, according to the U.S. Attorneys Office, which stated only a federal judge can decide cases related to federal land ownership.

The United States has a particular interest in the resolution of this case because Core Techs counterclaims threaten to adversely impact the chain of real estate title under which the United States reserved a reversionary interest in real estate if not used for public benefit, specifically a wastewater treatment plant that serves U.S. facilities at Andersen Air Force Base and Marine Corps Camp Blaz, Assistant U.S. Attorney Mikel Schwab told the Superior Court last August.

Even if the property on which the plant sits is no longer owned by GovGuam, it is at a minimum encumbered by the federal lease and easements that allow GWA to operate the plant, Schwab stated. If defendants wish to challenge the United States interests in and title to real property they must bring an action in federal district court.

See original here:
Core Tech wants at least $130M and rent in government land dispute - Guam Pacific Daily News

By Zachary Cohen, Annie Grayer and Ryan Nobles, CNN

CNN Talks between former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark and the House select committee investigating January 6 remain on ice nearly two months after the panel gave him a second chance to appear or face possible contempt charges.

Clark has not heard from the committee since his deposition was delayed in early December but still expects to invoke the Fifth Amendment when that meeting takes place, a source familiar with the situation tells CNN.

The committee moved late last year to hold Clark in contempt of Congress for defying his subpoena but then gave him another opportunity to meet with House investigators. That deposition then was postponed because of a "medical condition" that prevented him from participating.

The committee has been tight-lipped about any plans related to Clark since mid-December, but another source familiar with the investigation tells CNN they expect his appearance to be rescheduled very soon.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson told reporters last week that the panel has not yet rescheduled Clark's deposition because "he's still sick."

"He's had some challenges, and we're just working through them," the Mississippi Democrat added.

Committee members have consistently said they consider the former Justice Department official a key witness and have stressed the importance of having him sit for an interview, even if he won't answer their questions.

As a sympathizer to election fraud conspiracy theories, Clark became then-President Donald Trump's most useful asset inside the Justice Department in the days before January 6, 2021.

Clark pushed to pursue unfounded claims of voter fraud in the weeks after the November 2020 election. And, according to officials who interacted with Clark, he was in touch with Trump repeatedly.

The-CNN-Wire & 2022 Cable News Network, Inc., a WarnerMedia Company. All rights reserved.

See more here:
Talks between January 6 committee and former DOJ official, a key witness, remain on ice - WRAL.com